Lynette: Hello, welcome to the Overthinkers. I'm Lynette. Shann: And I'm Shan. Lynette: How you doing, Shan? Shann: Pretty good. I say that though. I woke up at three AM last night. my son wants to go pee. Classic four year old parent problem. And you know that what I'm doing at the moment is I'm reading we we've moved phones outside the bedroom. So we're because we realized it was not helping with the sleep whatsoever, and other things happening in the bedroom. And so we moved the phones out of the bedroom. And so now I'm I'm quote unquote you know, forced to read something. And so I've been reading a bit more when I have those wake up moments, 'cause it can take me a good hour to fall back asleep. And I've been obsessed with Jonathan Hyde lately. I mean, some of my friends must get bored of me mentioning it, to be completely honest. but the Righteous Mind, I'm not talking of the anxious generation, the whole social media stuff, which is interesting and, you know, impactful. But Righteous Mind for me is just one of the masterpieces of nonfiction books of this century. And and it was a fascinating read today. I was just hooked and I was basically up for two and a half hours reading the book because I could not put it down. And it was supposed to put me back to sleep. It was a whole chapter as to why religion matters and is much more important to humans than the new atheist school of thought, like the Richard Dawkins think it is. So there's a lot of things and I'm Maybe spending a bit of time on this because there'll be things that might be weaving into the conversation we're gonna be having today. This is not just gratuitous. But yeah, it was very interesting to kind of read that and I was really hooked and I just yeah. If you haven't had the chance to read it, you're listening to this, The Righteous Mind by Jonathan Haidt, definitely do yourself a favor, pick up the book, go through to the end. there's definitely he explores quite a few interesting things. Lynette: Yeah, I'm going to do that. I'm gonna read it and yeah, you're right. I think people need something to believe in, right? Again, and we we just need that to to keep going, right? and I you know, talking about believing in something, I think one Shann: Mm-hmm. Lynette: of the big, you know, questions I had today to overthink was why are we still talking about differentiation versus distinction? Right? And there seem to be still these camps of I believe in this versus I believe in this. And, you know, Sharp versus Ritson, they're wrong. This is wrong. you know, building on our last conversation with Tom Goodwin of, you know, our Is it a little bit of both? Like what is this whole, you know, I I get that the algorithms for it, I get that it's the provocation and the headline that grips people whenever we throw babies out with bath water. Right? Shann: Yeah. Lynette: Brand is dead, or you know, et cetera, et cetera. People click on things like that. We know that's our jobs, is to get people to click on things like Shann: Mm. Lynette: that. But I think the real expertise comes from the nuance. And you know, so that's, you know, my big question today is why are we still talking about differentiation versus distinction? Especially because, and I'm just gonna put this out there, I think Shann: Mm-hmm. Lynette: I've corrected for me personally, right? And for a lot of brands and companies that I work for with very, you know, intangible products. And it's this differentiated product, distinctive brand. Shann: Mm-hmm. Lynette: So yeah, I'm kind of like, okay, like that's that that's my belief. I guess that's my religion here is differentiate a product, make sure that you are always pushing the client or the company or the brand to be producing a product that is constantly innovative, right? That actually demands, you know, a a real pricing power, has real reasons to believe, right? You have real proof points to sell, and it creates longer term equity and a strategic moat. So you're pushing the client, you know, or the company you work for for that. But then you have to then, you know, wrap that differentiated product in a distinctive brand that creates mental availability that people know exists, that people remember, people recognize, et cetera. So I don't know. That's that's my my religion. How about yours? Shann: So I first of all definitely agree that differentiation is primarily a product objective and most of it is going to be driven through product. Distinctiveness is where the brand can play a lot. I do think the lines are a bit more blurry than that, as always. You know, there's a little bit of a it depends in terms of where it goes. I think, you know, the the the And I then I want to go a little bit why we're still talking about this. but the the reality is that it is possible for marketing to drive something that feels separate from the rest. And those two concepts, distinctiveness differentiation, it's very interesting because a lot of people use those terms interchangeably. I've seen many times I've seen papers written where you could sense like they were kind of mixing the two concepts as if they were the same thing. But there is a difference, right? Distinctiveness being this idea that you're recognizably you, the we know when we see you, we hear you, we feel you, we there there is something that our brain starts like, this is Coca-Cola speaking to me right now, or this is McDonald's speaking to me right now, right? That's the distinctiveness aspect is typically assets, sounds, visual cues, and so on. That Bring you, refresh your memories and just brings that brand to mind. And so it makes you distinctively you is the point. Differentiation is just like we are not like those guys over there. And so I think one of the reasons where we're talking about it still is a because I think there's misunderstanding around it, but also because there's been a lot of commentary. I mean, I, you know, as we were just talking about this before, I was just digging up an old. Post I wrote in 2018, which was titled, You know, Mark Ritson and Byron Sharp Should Hug It Out on Distinctive versus Differentiation. It's almost ten years, ten years old, right? As Lynette: Wow. Shann: a matter of fact, I actually even debated this with Mark, you know, over beers. I was way too drunk, but like we had a pretty heat argument. Because he was very much in the differentiation camp, or at least kind of saying to Byron Sharp, and with, you know, some good points. you can't just say that it's about distinctiveness. now I think the problem is there's been a lot of things have been attributed to both of those over the years. I think they've actually kind of softened a little bit when I said they should hug it out. They literally won't On a show in Cannes a couple of weeks ago, three weeks ago, and they kind of hugged it out a little bit. And I think that was not a key contention between them. And I think they both realize that distinctiveness is essential. You have to have distinctiveness. Differentiation for me is less essential. It can be a tool. But what Sharp has said, by the way, it's not a differentiation does not exist. He does think differentiation exist. He says it's like black and white in how brands grow. But his contention was it was rare. It was not as strong as people thought it was. And it was hard to keep over time because competitors come at you and gonna do similar things. So crappy cats. It is just a natural Lynette: Copycats, exactly. Yeah. Shann: thing. And so his contention, which I personally really agree with, is that once you know the Kotlerian view of marketing, which is the one I was raised on, my master has taught me this, right? Was kind of teaching people like, you know, differentiated brands, differentiated companies is Really, what drives the market. He's saying, like, well, maybe not so much. You know, looking like you might be more important. And so I think there is a lot of merit to the argument that Sharp has made. And I think it's helped a lot of people to kind of go there. The problem is it's been a pendulum swing where people were like, differentiation doesn't exist, it's irrelevant, and it's not true. It does exist, right? And I think that's one of the reasons that we're still talking about this. Is a definitions are always a little bit hazy. But also it's been a pretty heated topic. This has been a big swing in our industry. Like it used to be taught that differentiation was one of the holy grails. And someone came along in in the two thousand tens and because, like, guys, you've been wrong all this time. It is not as central as you think it is. It has created reactions and there's still some nerves being triggered by this. And now I think we're just we're going through the maturing phase where people are kind of reconciling those views and trying to put forward, you know, mixed or bothist views. I think Those two guys I've mentioned I have. I th I've seen Andrew Tyndall kind of writing a thing this week as as well on the drum that was talking a little bit about this. And so it is still a hot topic. I still think it's gonna be a hot topic probably in five years. I don't think it's gonna go away. That's kind of my Lynette: Yeah, yeah. Shann: sense of to why it's happening. Now, after whether distinctiveness is more important than differentiation and one it's more valuable or not to growth, I will just, you know, to counter you and I'll be here like to to t I'd like to hear that. I do think it is possible s sometimes for the brand to be a differentiating factor. and you know I will so I'll take one example that comes to mind to me is and you know liquid death for I is one of the interesting ones where it just really took water to a different stage. To the point I personally even took me a long time to realize it was a water brand personally. But the there is something about the way they've tackled it. You could argue that 90% of the job done is about distinctiveness here. And I'd I'd give merit to the argument. I do feel like they've kind of stepped a little bit beyond that. I do think there's been something Lynette: Mm-hmm. Shann: in the way they've approached it. The brutal diligence with which they've defined everything they were doing through that lens of what liquid death was going to be about was interesting interesting to me because it was the epitome of the least differentiated product in the world, water. And they've created that. And I think one might argue it is purely distinctiveness. I do not think it is purely distinctive enough. I think there's an ex exercise of positioning here. I think there's an there's an exercise of how they try to make themselves really special in the category. And that's where for me it kind of muddies the water because it is not impossible. It's just I think we have to move away from this view that every brand needs to be distin distinctive. That is for me the given. And that's why I think as a universalist view. It matters to have it and every mocker should be obsessed with distinct distinctiveness. Absolutely. It doesn't mean you can't go try to play with differentiation beyond what your product allows you to do. There are going to be moments where you can try to kind of land some of those things, I believe, within that space and I'd like to see see that. Lynette: Well, it's interesting. Let's say, you know, you said liquid death is, you know, the most undifferentiated product, it's water. And I actually think disagree and I think the how you sell it is part of the product as well, right? The the idea of the can, the design, Shann: Mm-hmm. Lynette: the you know, the distribution model, the you know, all of that is part of product. And you know, and all of that is part of brand, right? Which comes through that. And the way then they market through, you know, you know, the the stunts, right? Those are distinctive stunts. Like it's very red Red Bull-esque, right? But like the distinctive stunts, the distinctive t tone of voice, et cetera, for sure. But the product itself, they pushed that to be differentiated, right? And I think that no. Shann: Well, let me say one thing. Yes, you're absolutely right. But that is marketing. And at the end of the day, we're talking of marketing. And I think Lynette: interesting. I feel like we're we're going to something deeper here, which is product versus marketing, not differentiation versus distinction. Shann: Well, it it should not and you know, the different pieces of marketing, you know, product, place, promo like there are aspects of this and I think we might be sometimes taking a little too narrowly the definition as to where we really operate as marketeers in this case. I think what we've seen with Liquid Death is somebody who was very good at marketing, let's be honest, who took over this brand. I think they have brilliant marketeers behind this who've embraced the job of marketing as a whole, the way it's also meant to be. And to your point, yes, there is the way they packaged it, great. My point though is what is intrinsically inside the can is water. And at that not great water, by the way. It is just like very, very low quality water. But they've wrapped it all around. And I think, you know, we have to be mindful that I think this debate is a marketing debate, not just an advertising debate. And it's easy to kind of cut up into that thing and create that moment. Yes. For advertising on its own to drive differentiation? Fuck no. I mean, let's be real here. That's just not gonna happen. It needs that concert that concerted effort, which for me appeals to what a holistic marketer would think about. Lynette: Yeah, completely. And I think, you know, having worked very closely with product, right? On that side of with small businesses, with business my my own business, you're yeah, y you're right. I have blurred the lines a little bit between product and marketing and brand, which inherently isn't a bad thing. You know, because you're Shann: It's it's exactly what we should be doing. Lynette: exactly that's exactly what we should be doing. And I think that's where the collapse of differentiation and distinction need to meld is exact Exactly. You know, the question of which came first, the can or the marketing? Right? The can or the you know, who like which came up with that first? And I think it all once again goes back to brand, which is J helping you decide why do you exist? What are we selling? Are we selling water or are we selling like extreme hydration? You know what I mean? What are we like, right? What what's the category that we sell in and therefore how do we sell in a way that is differentiated with the product and distinctive as a brand? And I think that's where, you know, that triangle really needs to come together because, you know, for example even working with IBM, a B2B solution, in which people, you know, a lot of a lot of the argument has been great, distinctive brand assets work if you're selling toothpaste or you know, Coca-Cola or you know chicken wings. But if you're selling a very, you know, long tail, long-term, very expensive thing like a B2B solution or a luxury, it you know, distinctiveness doesn't apply. And I would say in some ways, once again, you gotta do both, but I do think the differentiate a product. Then becomes very important. And you know, working with let's say IBM Mobile Solutions, there were 47 different types of products. And it was like, okay, how do we differentiate you from the market? You don't have 47, you actually have one. And that is all of these things, mobile solutions help your workers make mission critical decisions on the go. That's ultimately what it does. That is how you differentiate the product, and then how you market it needs to be in a way that is distinctive. Right? And I think that's, I don't know, that's where it gets messy for me, the differentiation versus distinctive. Cause I at heart I would like to just continue using the word differentiated. I get you want to market in a way that's differentiated. So maybe tell me more what you're thinking about why then distinctiveness owns in the marketing space. Shann: I think it owns it partly because of how brands grow a bit more lately in the discourse. But I also think it owns it rightfully so a bit more. for two different reasons. The first one is, let's be honest, I think a lot of marketing has shrunk in terms of its breadth of application. And to your point, I think there's a ton of marketeers out there and it was a frustration of mine when I was working in my agency well the last few years is we barely touched the product. And the rate is that most of the time marketing was experienced as a I mean CMOs, the the CMOs whose entire job is to kinda figure out how you talk about the brand in advertising or stunts or whatever, but have very little in fact impact on the product. That is, I think, a a and to your point, is since differentiation has a stronger tie to the product, basically the the tool in the toolbox that marketers are left with is distinctiveness. And so there is I think that aspect of because we've shrunk it beyond what we should be doing as marketeers, it's problematic. And I also think that it is meaningful because it is the most universal. Every brand needs distinctiveness. And so when you try to kind of put forward principles of marketing, the more universal principle is, the more likely it is going to be picked up as a central part. And distinctiveness is something that I think a lot of mockers have woken up to in great part thanks to Sharp, and the way he was very, you know, bullish about distinctiveness with his teams and the Oranberg Bass Institute at large, not just Sharp. I think that created a narrative around it which was good because we were really running into issues where advertising was just not attributable at all, or even marketing in its in its own right. And People were messing with their brand assets too much, and and the obsession obsession with change was kind of damaging those distinctive assets. And so I think there's been a little bit of a reckoning that existed here. But by and large, for me, the problem is we gotta figure out a way to understand that differentiation is also tied so heavily to the product that we need to be close to that conversation. And that's the conversation that I was having with Mark when we were drunk and getting mad at each other. You know, he would take examples where, you know, like, you know. You work with Donna Karen from New York, like well and this creates a different vibe and so it's differentiated. Yeah, because she's from New York. And luxury brands coming to Italy are differentiated from others because they're from Italy. But there was intrinsic reality, reason to believe that was tied to this. And most of the examples we're arguing over that day. and so it's it's it's very it's very easy, I think, for for for marketers To lose sight of the symbiosis of everything that needs to go right for differentiation to land. And I'm kind of hoping that that aspiration, I mean, because I I love the way you framed it. Product drives differentiation, brand drive drives distinctiveness. I think is the best, and I'm gonna quote it quote quote unquote quote simplistic, but it's a fantastic, simplistic framework that I wish more people would understand. And not as an encouragement to say, let's not touch differentiation, but as an encouragement to say, hey. How can we figure this out to be better at this? Because we can't solve it with just one tool if you want to be attacking the market. I do think differentiation, this is where I would probably diverge a little bit from Sharp, not hugely, but I you know, I think he underweights a little bit that aspect. I also think the way they probe differentiation with their customers, you know, it's it's an indicator. I don't think it's the only one. But you know, if you take the the brands that have driven those things for a long time, like Apple and whatnot, with which were the poster child. There is something about the through and throughness of it. Like the the Steve Jobs was an expert at understanding that the entirety of it was the experience that draws the difference from the font you were using on it to the mark to the to advertising you were running around it and whatnot. And that visionary core that is expressed through the entire organization, for it to drive differentiation, I do think is a competitive advantage. I really do. And that's what I that's what I enjoy the most about what I'm doing now as an entrepreneur, even though I'm not never gonna reach the scales of Steve Jobs or any other brands I've worked on, most likely. But is like I can come back and just like I am thinking right now as I'm launching my company in the next few days, you know, I'll tell you there is aspects of every quote unquote touch point in it where I'm like trying to sprinkle things and bring this to life. And it has that ethos in both the way the product comes to life, the way it's designed, the way the the the advertising is going to be, the way we the language we use, but I'm trying to create that very holistic experience to make it look like something a bit unique in its segment, when it comes to AI intelligence. Lynette: Excited. Excited to see what that is. but yeah, no, I I agree. And I think, you know, a really good example is in a very mature saturated category. Once again, that's the difference, right? Mature saturated Shann: Yeah. Lynette: categories, like let's say telco. Basically, at the end of the day, it became a coloring competition. Is it red, blue, or pink, right? And who's more which is more funny, and you know, who's spending more on a you know, on a celebrity. And I think that Knowing that there's a cap to distinctiveness, right? And people keep trying to push that, it does continue to drive real differentiated product or the need for that and real product innovation. For example, that's a Verizon launching my plan, right? There's like there is a push. Shann: Small innovation. Lynette: Yes, yes, incrementalism, I totally understand, which is why then, when it comes to thinking that, you know, when T Mobile came out, you know, on Carrier, was that a distinction? Distinctiveness thing, or were they going, you know what, we need a completely different shaded product? And that was where it came from, which is let's untether. Right? Let's, you know, let's do no contracts. Let's, you know, et cetera. And that is differentiated product. But where did that come from? And I think this sits in the best organizations I've worked with or in, I think Shann: Yeah. Lynette: are the ones in which marketing also plays the role of the consumer champion. They Shann: hundred percent. Lynette: own research and insights. They know the consumer so much that the product team goes to them and goes, Tell me what we should make. Right? Because that's the that's the role of the marketer, is they are able to see the trends happening, right? Connect all the dots. Five years coming, right? They know where the society is at, they know what the sentiment is, they know how people are feeling about the brand, about the product, they know what's missing, they know what the unmet need is. And, you know, when you own that space and the product team comes to you and goes, What do we make now? Then that is the most powerful spot, I think, of of any marketer organization. Yeah. Which is why Shann: Hundred percent. Very important. Lynette: yeah, which is why I think we you know, love working with ourselves, with you know, entr in a entrepreneurial or in a even small businesses is because you do get a little bit more of that mix, you know. Shann: I mean y y you brought up, you know, telcos. It it it was an extremely painful category for me to work on. it's the biggest budgets on the surface of the earth for a single brand that exists. we're talking I think two billion dollars a year roughly per market leader in the single market to try to kind of win customers. And we're talking of Hundred thousand, two hundred thousand dollars customers who might switch an entire year. So it's just the ratio is ridiculous, right? And highly commoditized, they struggle a lot. And that frustration was just out of for was felt because I could sense like they were equipped. I mean, they were making a ton of money. They were paying really pe people really well. They had super smart people, they have super smart people in those teams and those companies. Still, I mean Timo, Verizon, I've I've met brilliant people. And I just feel like These people are just raring desk chairs and it's just really painful. Like so many little things that at the end of the day make so little difference. that are just not consequentially enough. It is it is it has been a rather painful thing for me to watch and be a for a short time a part of because of that. Because there's at at the core, it's a category that's screaming for. We have a deeper problem. And the deeper problem is We're all roughly the same. It is a game of coverage. It's the game of some of the technical stuff. They've made some changes on how they approach 5G each and but it was it was just you could sense the frustration bubbling up in some of those people, realizing like most of the things they were doing was just the tears of the Titanic lobby. Lynette: True. mean granted each you know, each percentage or tier is millions of millions of dollars. but yes, I I I hear you. and I think, you know, I would love for yeah, I would love for marketing to get to the point of product people being like Shann: Mm-hmm. Lynette: We're at a loss now. Everything we're creating is incremental. Tell us like what is the next phenomenal use case that we or need in the market that you're seeing that we should go solve at, right? Shann: Yeah. Yeah. Lynette: that we should then apply all of our attention to. And I think we got to a little bit of that point at Samsung with the foldables, because you know, you, you know, I remember meeting the engineers and being like, you know, they're like, we folded the phone. And then we're like, why? And then they're like, we don't know. You tell us. Yeah, but we can follow that. You tell us. Shann: But we can fold it. Lynette: And that is, you know, that is also an amazing point where we then just you know, we then t like tested and analyzed all of the you possible use cases for them. So marketing and product became friends and said, Well, these are the three use cases that people want the most. How do we make them better? Okay, you've you work on that, we'll work on this, and then at some point we're gonna be able to tell that story. story together, right? And that I think, you know, is ideally where we get to. And you know, what I loved about working at Ogave V Consulting was you got to influence a lot of product innovation. We did this for Hilton. Yeah, we did this for Hilton of what partnerships, you know, in terms of lifestyle or adventure companies, how do you, you know, rethink your portfolio to rethink your products and gaps. And so, you know, I think they're just a lot possible to push on differentiated product. And I think if marketers can start seeing their roles as a little bit of both, it'll open up hopefully more meaning to what we do. Yeah. Shann: And I think we talked a little bit about this in one of the episodes. But for me, for strategists, that's the holy grail is when you can really impact that through line. It's just and which is why for me being a specialized strategist, you know, just working on the social aspect of how you do the advertising is not a complete waste of time. It's useful to learn some of that and s and whatnot. But you really want to do strategy, you have to experience once in your career what you just described with your consulting aspect. And you know, it goes through how the product is created, but at some point there's going to be even things of how does the company treat its employees, how does it work with partners, how it it there's so much that can be Lynette: Completely. Who? Which partners? Yeah. Shann: engineered to create an identity. And to get back to my Jonathan Hyde reference and whatnot, you know, his point of religion was interestingly and morality. What religion does really, really well is people being willing to sacrifice themselves for the greater good of the group. That's one of the fundamental aspects of what he does. And he he says we have to dissociate a little bit religion as the belief in the supernatural, which is one aspect of it. But ultimately what he does really, really well. And they have plenty of data that shows it, religious group versus atheist group or secular secular groups. Secular groups tend to fail at much higher rates because at some point the individual asks too many questions and feels like it's not good enough for me personally versus religious groups have much more of that group feel, right? And so I think, you know, to bring it back to the the topic now, that aspect of how we are able to operate as companies and drive things, it can't just be a question of optimizing the advertising. It just can't. There has to be a through line in terms of everything we do for this to really land. And that's, you know, that differentiation distinctiveness question is, I think, still present to our question of the podcast. Partly because it's a tension that we are feeling on a day-to-day basis. It is something that is making it harder for us to kind of act upon because we know to kind of really get that buy-in, that followship, that it is going to require everything to work in sync. And as a strategist, the more you can get in projects where you can work across that, the more fun you're gonna have is my experience. Lynette: Yeah, that's right. So, you know, let's go have more fun. I think that's a good takeaway Shann: I hope so. Lynette: to the big question of why are we still talking about it? 'Cause you know, it's kinda fun. So Shann: We have unresolved business. It it might be betraying some deeper problems in ourselves than just whether distinctiveness or differentiation is is is what is the right thing. Is I think there is a deeper underlying question that this is hiding about what are we really doing here? What is that we're influencing and how do we influence it? How do we drive the things that we genuinely all want to see? Disproportionate results, growth that outpaces the competition. And I think in Andrew Tyndall Tyndall kind headlined it pretty well when he talked about this when he said like in his piece on on on the drum where he was basically arguing you can have the most distinctive brand, but don't be dull. Like, you know, if it's dull it's not gonna work. So yeah how do we get to the whole is for me ultimately the question. It's not about Lynette: Yeah. True, but also don't be so interesting. True, but also don't be so interesting, but I have a shit product. So So vice versa. Shann: I mean look. Liquid death. Yeah, yeah. I just I don't think it's Lynette: I know you don't like their water, but man, drinking water from a can just feels so good. You know, you just feel like baller. Shann: yeah. I don't think I'd ever go to a place like I really need a liquid death water to fill to quench my thirst right now. Lynette: Well then you've never been then you've never been to Gotham Gym in New York City. Or you've never been to the gyms in New York City where it's like just glu like fridges and fridges of liquid death and people pumping iron and the dr cracking of water, you know? And that's just it's a whole experience. It's a whole experience. Shann: Yeah. Lynette: So it's a differentiated experience. Alrighty. Exactly. Shann: It is. The experience is part of it. Awesome. Well that was see, we we were debating before we recorded this listeners that can we talk about this for twenty minutes and here we are, we went over time. So Lynette: We hope you're still with us. and you know, let us know what your belief is on differentiation and distinction, because I am truly, truly interested to know. So all right, we'll see you next time. Shann: Awesome. Thank you very much, Jeanette. I'll speak to you next week. Bye bye. Lynette: Bye.